iPhone code cracked

Page 1 of 3  
The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story: http://alturl.com/b9ixp The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.
--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 21:36:17 -0500, "Dean Hoffman"

Apple definitely lost this battle. They could have just cracked one phone. Now the FBI has the key to crack them all.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 03/28/2016 09:54 PM, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

FBI never should have gone to Apple in the first place, it just made them look dumb
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That didn't make them look dumb, leaking the hack made them look dumb. It was better when ISIS thought Apple was bullet proof.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 03/28/2016 11:06 PM, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

Somehow I just can't imagine that we of the public have been made privy to the real truth of the matter.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/29/2016 5:28 AM, philo wrote:

I agree with that. I don't think we ever heard the whole story. It all seemed too pat for me.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:45:27 AM UTC-4, SeaNymph wrote:

none of it matters
Apple will make the next OS version more secure and make it impossible for their own engineers to crack. Apple doesn't want to be in this position again.
In that sense, Apple won becasue no leagal precident was set that can stop them from making their OS more secure, which is what they want to do.
Which is the right answer. There should be a limit to what a govt (any govt) can demand.
What if it was a Samsung phone? Can the FBI make demands on a non US company? Can another govt make demands on Apple? Its a can of worms.
If the FBI or NSA or KGB can crack it without Apples help, fine. Have at it. Just don't ask me to help.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 9:04:31 AM UTC-4, snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote:

There was never any such issue in this case to begin with. Nothing involving what Apple can or can't do with future products was at issue. It was about helping the FBI get into one existing phone.

There are. Unfortunately now we don't know where that line is. But we likely will because I expect other law enforcement, somewhere, will bring a similar case.

Samsung would probably have helped. And it's the job of courts to sort out those issues.

I see, so you have a problem with legitimate court ordered search warrants to access terrorist's phones? Nice.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I've discussed this with you before.
Many other people agree that this case is NOT just about this particular phone.
This case IS all about setting a legal precident.
You refuse to acknowledge that fact.
So YOU are ok with helping the KGB? (if you read what I wrote)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 1:40:29 PM UTC-4, snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote:

How am I helping the KGB? The KGB is a party here? Does the KGB have a search warrant from an American court allowing the search? Good grief. And what precedent exactly are we setting? Apple has already assisted the govt with unlocking cell phones in 70 other cases. It's just that in this most heinous of cases, that suddenly Tim Cook for some reason got the urge to not cooperate. Hope he and you are happy. Instead of Apple doing it quietly, now the phone was unlocked by persons unknown, could be a teenage hacker who's next move is to post the solution on the internet. Or it could be posted by one of 100 others who may also be trying to crack it, just they are a little further behind. So, are you happy now? Apple happy? Are Apples customers better off now instead of Apple doing it quietly?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 1:53:24 PM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:

I am happy that the govt got the info they say they needed AND that NO LEGAL precident was set allowing a govt to force companies to do their bidding.
Frankly i would be disappointed in the NSA if they actually NEEDED anyones help for this kind of thing.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 29 Mar 2016 13:48:27 -0700 (PDT), snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote:

The NSA is prohibited by law from cracking a phone that was not on foreign soil. The dispute right now is how much they are allowed to monitor calls and data originating outside the country but ending up here. I can see why they would not publically enter this debacle.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/29/2016 6:04 AM, snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote:

Exactly. They will design the *hardware* so that NO SOFTWARE UPDATE can alter these behaviors. When "ordered" to comply, they will say, "OK, give us the phone, we are going to erase the CIRCUITRY and lay down NEW CIRCUITRY; in the process, effectively DESTROYING the phone and its contents But, hey, if that's what you want...."

Yes. And, if laws are enacted to prevent them from making a secure device, can they simply become a FOREIGN CORPORATION? Can they simply refuse to offer their products for sale in the US? "Dear iPhone customer, As of <date> your $600 telephone will no longer be supported. Nor will your government allow you to purchase a new product from us. Oh, and, by the way, your congresscritter's phone number and email address appear on the screen below this message..."

Amusing considering how the same government went to bat *for* Apple to prevent it from caving to similar demands of the *Chinese* gummit!

It's not a question of *asking* but, rather, of FORCING assistance. "Forced speech". "Mr Cronkite, we want to exploit YOUR GOOD NAME AND REPUTATION for our benefit. This court order insists that you tell everyone to vote Republican in the upcoming election on each of your newscasts between now and the election."
The feds blew this. They insisted Apple could develop this technology and "magically" contain it from getting out into the wild. Now, amusingly, they find themselves in exactly the same position: can they be sure their employees (<cough> snowden) and the employees of whatever firm assisted in the operation will continue to keep secret (from big, bad apple) the means by which they gained access to the phone's contents?
When prosecuters from those other jurisdictions seeking to crack iPhones for ongoing CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS (no dead terrorists but, rather, murderers, rapists, drug dealers, tax evaders, pedophiles, etc.) start asking for *their* phones to be unlocked, will the feds willingly "share their secret"?
When the defense attorneys for each of those defendants challenge the integrity and validity of any such evidence obtained (in an OPEN, *US* court, not a "secret court" -- guantanamo), will the feds be able to say, "Trust us, that's what was in the phone. We're not going to tell you how we know -- cuz Apple might find out! Madame Zelda has never been wrong when it comes to her tea leave readings..."?
Do we suddenly start shipping everyone with a cracked iPhone off to gitmo just so we can suspend the rule of law?
So, its a foregone conclusion that Apple *will* (!) know what exploit was discovered. For the feds to say "we're not going to tell you" can then be parlayed into "The feds WANT your iPhone to be hackable! Write your congressman demanding your right to privacy!" Of course, pointing to J Flaming Edgar, McCarthy, Nixon, Snowden, etc. to further stoke the fears of government abuses -- should play right into the hands of those "big government" foes...
And, given their public stance, Apple will probably go out of their way to ensure that exploit is fixed -- in software and/or hardware (when you are making hundreds of millions of <anything> you can easily slip a change into production without having to recall every unit in the field).
If they feel their reputation as been sullied, they can "simply" offer $50,000 to the first person (or firm) that can demonstrate a NEW hack of their next product -- and publicize how long the prize goes unclaimed ("Gee, I guess no pimply faced teenagers interested in a $50K prize? Maybe we should up the ante to $100K? $250K?? I.e., add a few pennies to every iPhone sale to pay for a POTENTIAL crack??")
[Rivest et al. did this when they introduced their breakthrough technology in the late 70's But, they were "mere mortals" without the deep pockets of the largest corporation on the planet!]
And, NONE OF THIS does anything to anticipate the next attack -- unless they stumble upon PHYSICAL POSSESSION of another iPhone before such an attack (which, as seems to be the case in Belgium, could just ACCELERATE the timetable for it). "Gee, you've got all these tools to pry into our secrets (all the while getting REALLY UPSET when YOURS are leaked) yet you STILL can't keep us safe?" Or, when/if it gets into the hands of hackers and Apple publicizes the fact that this is "probably" a result of the Feds very public effort of prying into their technology? Or, the firm that assisted in the effort being hacked (e.g., by a NATION STATE intent on gaining access to that technology)?
And, does absolutely nothing to protect against someone using an encryption technology that Apple doesn't control! That the phone doesn't *preserve*! etc. Just because the feds make obvious blunders: "Reset the cloud password for this phone! (Ooops!)" "OK, boys, lets UNPLUG this computer and pack it up to bring down to the digital forensics lab for analysis..." etc. doesn't mean folks who are intent on doing wrongs (in a VERY BIG WAY) will be similarly inept.
Finally, it still leaves the issue of precedent unresolved. They *may* have some stale (?) information (clues to an attack in Belgium?) from two lone wolves but have made their work going forward all the more difficult (while raising expectations as to what they *will* be able to do!)
Yes, the feds lost big time!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 3:09:43 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:

I see. So for example, all iPhones will have the 10 strikes and it erases everything implemented in hardware with no possible way for the user to turn it off? Doesn't sound like a good idea to me. What about the users that don't want that to happen?

Wrong. No such thing was at issue in the case.

That would seem to depend on what the hypothetical new law would actually say.

More nonsense thrown in for good measure.
Nor will your government allow you to purchase

Totally absurd attempt at comparison. Apple is not being compelled or asked to say anything.

Good grief. It's clear that Apple is the big loser here. Apple told it's customers that they had purchased a very secure product. So secure that Apple couldn't trust themselves to help unlock that one phone in their own labs, where they were in control of everything. Cook said that if they did that, well somehow magically all the iPhones in the whole world would be compromised, no longer secure, their user's information at risk etc., even though nothing ever left Apple's lab. So now, some unknown party, possibly a teenage hacker has done it instead. Therefore exactly what Cook told Apple customers would be devastating has happened and what's orders of magnitude worse, it happened with God know who in control of the method, instead of Apple.

It may not be the govts to share, depending on what kind of agreement they reached with whoever provided the help. But not to worry, now that Apple went public with all this, threw down the gauntlet, I would be surprised if there aren't plenty of hackers out there working on the problem and before long how to do it could be all over the internet.

That assumes that there is a trial, that the phone data is necessary evidence for the trial, etc. And then it would be up to the court to decide what exactly in the process is relevant and what is not.

Forget to take your pills today?

Only if they are told.

Clearly they have no duty to cooperate with Apple, especially given Apple's refusal to cooperate with the govt.

Please, take those pills!

Wow, who would have ever thought that.

Sounds like you're as confused as Tim Cook.

It was never about encryption technology in this case. It was about 10 strikes and it erases.
That the phone doesn't *preserve*!

How exactly did the feds lose again? The feds wanted the phone unlocked and they got it. Apple told the world that if they, Apple, unlocked it that all the existing iPhones would be compromised. So now, someone, quite possibly a hacker, has done exactly that. Instead of Apple doing it quietly, in their own lab, keeping what they did secret, someone else is now in possession of how to get into all those iPhones. Apple lost big time.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com posted for all of us...

What one man can make another man can break (Unknown-but I'll take credit).
--
Tekkie

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/28/2016 11:03 PM, philo wrote:

They should have hired Michelle Obama's friend who did such a wonderful job with the Obamacare internet set up.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/28/2016 7:54 PM, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

FBI needs physical possession of the phone to crack it in this way. The solution they wanted from Apple would have allowed them to PUSH an update to any phone IN THE WILD and crack it remotely.
FBI lost this battle. And, Apple can now work on other approaches to make iPhone7 "impossible" for them to comply with ANY court ordered mandates.
FBI was stupid in how they handled this one!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 20:12:55 -0700, Don Y

No, they didn't ask for that. In fact, though the FBI had the phone, they were willing to give it to Apple to let them work on it and not tell anyone else what they did.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

... thereby breaking the chain of custody, and rendering any information retrieved by Apple completely useless for any criminal prosecution -- so says an attorney I heard discussing the case on the radio a couple of weeks ago.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/29/2016 4:10 AM, Doug Miller wrote:

The feds will argue that they aren't looking for evidence, just "tips".
[Of course, any of those other court cases still pending now can probably be challenged by defense attorneys: "My client claims the 'evidence' The State has introduced has been tampered with. We demand to know *HOW* that evidence was obtained. We've retained a crew of former Apple employees to examine, carefully, the State's claims as to how they extracted it from this device..."]
Apple was asked to WRITE SOFTWARE, cryptographically *sign* that software and then introduce it to the phone (via the normal update mechanism). The feds spelled out EXACTLY what the differences between that software and the "normal" software would be. I.e., it didn't include anything that would make a casual user of an "updated" phone realize that it had been hacked. The changes would only be noticed by a person wanting to circumvent the protections on the phone: "Gee, I wonder if my phone has been hacked? How can I test this theory? Ah! I can deliberately enter a bad passcode 11 times and see if I end up BRICKING my phone (in which case, it has NOT been hacked). If it still works after that 11th attempt, I'll know the phone has been hacked!" D'uh...
The feds lost this -- and probably KNEW they would lose in the courts. Now that the feds have an "alternative remedy", they can't argue that they should be able to compel Apple to "write software" -- even resorting to 200 year old laws! And, Apple can spin this as "why should we be compelled to 'speak' (the act of writing software is a form of speech) what YOU want us to speak"?
But, this tool will only help them with phones of which they can gain physical custody. So, they're stuck in perpetual "catch up" mode.
And, the bad guys now know that they should toss their phone into a wood chipper before embarking on any evil deeds!
Apple, of course, now knows that they should ensure any future phones have the protection mechanisms built into *hardware* -- so they can't be tweeked (under court order) by rewriting the software.
Yes, the feds were stupid to let this boil over into the public...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.